Diesels are a different animal. Might as well compare apples to kumquats.

 

Diesel engines make low end torque, do not rev high, lug and chug and work all day long.

The 300 makes low end torque, does not rev high, lugs and chugs all day long.

Apples to kumquats? You're full of chit.

 

Diesels are a different animal... for purposes of the topic of this thread. We are talking about the comparison of the 300 to the 302 as equipped in the Bronco. Gas engines... if I recall correctly that were NEVER available in the Excursion. Apples to kumquats!

 

Gas engines were available in Excursions V8 and V10.......you are going off topic greystreak..... Bxtchie1 only mentioned a diesel Excursion....... "ALSO".....with no intent for anyone to dwell on it ....read !

 

there is more to the story of the 302 then being pathetic on low end torque, its an awesome engine paired to the mazda 5 speed found in the late 80's through 96 for trucks. i swear it could do a wheelie if it hooked. that thing has endless power.

if you put an AOD behind the 302, its a lousy sack of smit nobody likes. i could outrun some small fuel economy cars with it but nothing else. its like driving with the parachute open. it can't tow its self over small hills at highway speeds.

did i mention it has white under the oil cap and in the pcv and breather? very poor downfall to the engine is the block doesn't have a crank case breather and builds moisture


and for the 300 4.9, they sound funny. people tend to like them. i haven't driven one but i wouldn't hesitate to own one either (based on reviews)

 

I wasn't saying the 300 makes 380 horsepower and 800 lb ft of torque.

I'm saying the 300 makes 145 hosepower and 260 lb ft of torque like a diesel would.

 

Hey there's no doubt the 302 is a great engine. It gets a bad wrap. Let it breathe and pair it with the correct gears and you have one mean smallblock. I've seen what those things can do at the strip. If I remember correctly, it was a 302 mustang that nearly destroyed every other car on Pinks All Out.

 

The 300 is only pulling 260 ft-lbs ??........feels better............what is a 302 ??

 

260, maybe 265 ft lbs. A 302 is pulling closer to 270, maybe 280 ft lbs. This is stock. 180 horse.

What do you mean "feels better.." ? I'm very confused!

Here's a dynograph. A 300 vs a 302. I can't see it for spit but maybe you guys can. It shows the 300 making great power down low and the 302 basically picking up where the 302 dies off. It's very interesting.



Well it won't let me post the freaking picture. I'll have to double post again. What in the world?

 

The 300 pulls like a mule compared to the 302......are you saying the 302 develops more torque ???

 

Yes sir, the 302 makes more torque.

It's all in how an engine MAKES and USES it's power. The carb'd 300's made 255 ft lbs of torque by 1,400 RPM. That is right off the ground pulling power.

The lower an engine can make it's max torque the easier it gets a load moving. The longer an engine can hold onto it's power band the better it will pull.

A 300 makes low end torque and has a nice torque curve. The 302, while making MORE torque, doesn't make it as low as the 300. The 300 makes it's power from idle to 3,400 RPM. The 302 makes it's power higher up in the powerband. The 302 is a beast of an engine for making a car go fast but the 300 is a better truck engine.

It's all in how the engine is designed. The 300 has a 4'' bore and a 3.98'' stroke. It's designed to pull.

 

300 drives and feels much stronger than a 302 in the Bronco......hard to believe......especially since my grandfather's 69' F600 cattle truck was the six.....302 would never deal with that ...

 

Hey njneer, was that six in the cattle truck a 300 or 240?

The 302 stock is choked up from Ford.. It's a shame really. But I think the same thing of the 300. Ford really should have paid better attention to the 300 and 302.

You like that 383? I think I took a ride in a Roadrunner here in '10 with a 383. I got religious real quick.

 

Sure do.......Mopar 383 is the best of both worlds.....big torque and 7500 rpm.....shift when it stops pullin...that's how you drive it....
where you at in WV ? I am a native !

 

I think these types of threads are funny and full of irony. I like all Ford engines because I'm a Ford fan. Some are better than others and I think all will agree. When it comes to the 300 over 302 you hear the points like no timing chain, seven main bearings, etc, etc. And I agree I love a 300-6. I like one so much that I installed one in a 1952 GMC 6X6. Cannot destroy it and I've tried. But when you hear that the 300 is better just because it IS an inline six and then you read the other threads comparing the 5.9 Cummins to the IH 6.0, the arguments shift the other way. 'The 6.0 is better because it revs higher, it is a v-8, it has more moving parts, blah, blah, blah'. I just think that is funny to watch the diehards argue one side and than argue the other. I like the IH 6.0, it makes modest power and is semi-reliable. I equate it to the 351m of the diesel world.